Teams

BRMST RED

2021 CTA ADULT 18-39 - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN

7 players · average NTRP 4.00 / COLORADO

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2021-07-19vs SSD GREENSplit 11
W#1 Female DoublesSamantha Sutphin / Morgan Arvisais vs Quin Bowman / Emily Brennan6-2, 6-1
L#1 Female SinglesChelsea Sump vs Mary Brennan1-6, 3-6
2021-07-12vs PRC NAVYWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesHillary Riley / Morgan Arvisais vs Kristin Prosowski / Jessica Franks6-3, 7-5
2021-06-28vs NJ GREENLost 02
L#1 Female SinglesHillary Riley vs Talia Cioth1-6, 2-6
L#2 Female SinglesChelsea Sump vs Gretchen Cork2-6, 2-6
2021-06-21vs PRC NAVYLost 02
L#1 Female SinglesSamantha Sutphin vs Megan Lantz4-6, 0-6
L#2 Female SinglesHillary Riley vs Diana McClintock3-6, 4-6
2021-06-14vs SSD GREENWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesSamantha Sutphin / Pauline Touch vs Maddy Mayer / Anna Boucher6-3, 6-0
2021-06-07vs NJ GREENWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesPauline Touch / Chelsea Sump vs Margie Rodgers / Megan Shibao6-3, 6-2
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Flight standings7 teams · WOMEN 4.0 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NJ RED6014410124
2CP RED4213512131
3DTC RED4211718153
4WP GOLD3310820158
5WP RED2461228187
6CP GREEN1561227199
7BRMST RED1531530185

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 3.67 estimated across 5 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.76
Samantha Sutphin
usually #1 Female Doubles 67%, also #1 Female Singles 33% · published 4
3.74
Hillary Riley
usually #2 Female Singles 33%, also #1 Female Singles 33% · published 4
3.72
Chelsea Sump
usually #1 Female Doubles 33%, also #2 Female Singles 33% · published 4
3.56
Morgan Arvisais
published 4
3.56
Aly Miller
published 4
Olivia Belton
published
Pauline Touch
published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Morgan Arvisais + Samantha Sutphin5064% games+8.8% vs expected
Hillary Riley + Morgan Arvisais13653% games−2.6% vs expected
Hillary Riley + Samantha Sutphin134 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

4
Samantha Sutphin
83W–57L career · 3 lines in 2021
2%95%3%
3.76
4
Hillary Riley
70W–65L career · 3 lines in 2021
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Chelsea Sump
35W–46L career · 3 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Morgan Arvisais
58W–56L career · no lines in 2021
31%69%<1%
3.56
4
Aly Miller
19W–34L career · no lines in 2021
32%67%<1%
3.56
Olivia Belton
11W–9L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Pauline Touch
5W–12L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.